OPPONENTS of Greater Manchester's proposed congestion charge have met shadow transport secretary Theresa Villiers, who accused the government of `blackmail'.
She was in Bolton launching the Tory party's transport manifesto for the local elections.
The 10 councils of Greater Manchester have submitted a bid for £1.2bn, plus permission to borrow £1.8bn more, to the government's Transport Innovation Fund (TIF).
The controversial bid, which would pay for massive investments in trams, trains and buses, includes plans for a peak-hour congestion charge. But a final decision looks set to be put off until after the May 1 polls.
Ms Villiers said local councils should be left to decide themselves whether to implement congestion charging. And she accused the government of being `devious' by linking the policy with transport funding.
She said: "I am very concerned the government is linking TIF money to congestion charging.
"This is a way of blackmailing local authorities into doing what it wants."
What do you think? Have your say.
Tweet
Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All
Simon B, www.manchestertolltax.com (31/03/2008 at 10:31)
It is blackmail by Nu Labour.
Sean Corker, Manchester (31/03/2008 at 11:06)
The £1200 million Manchester might get from the Government also includes £400+ million of con charge infrastructure costs.
Its time Manchester Council put Manchester first, not guinea pig a New Labours national road pricing policy that has been indefinitely cancelled
Graeme, Manchester (31/03/2008 at 11:14)
Kurt Stephens, Sale (31/03/2008 at 11:20)
However, and it is a huge however, they are giving us no idea of how we would provide the additional capacity that will be required to move people around the conurbation as the economy continues to grow.
All around the world, as cities develop, and their economies grow, there is more of a need for high quality, high capacity transport infrastructure, neither private nor public transport will be able to cope with the growing demand we wil experience in Manchester if our growth is not to be stunted.
So, we have a choice, accept that our growth will be stunted by crippling congestion, or develop a high class private and public transport system, and the only way to do that with either main party in power is with TIF.
With regards Birmingham, they have failed to bid for TIF, and also just had the tram extensions through the Black Country and city centre cancelled. Many in power down their are looking on enviously at our bid.
New Street station, as a part of the National transport infrastructure has been funded, just as Piccadilly was a decade ago, but lets not misrepresent the situation and claim the Birmingham is getting any sort of major investment in it's local public transport, to do so is simply very misleading
Kurt Stephens, Sale (31/03/2008 at 11:24)
That is, is more people abstain from the vote than vote for or against the proposals then the council should also be urged to abstain?
Will of the people and al that, or do they not have the confidence to get the 80% out to vote no as has been claimed previously?
Steve Pottage (31/03/2008 at 11:31)
Chris, Irlam (31/03/2008 at 11:40)
Kurt Stephens, Sale (31/03/2008 at 11:48)
How can we provide better transport links to the poor areas of the conurbation without massively improved bus, tram and train systems, all with integrated ticketing?
Be 100% sure what you're for when you are against TIF as it is not a great place to be heading.
One last thought for this morning, why on her visit did Theresa Williers not promise that under a Tory government they would invest in the buses, trams and trains as much as TIF would, without the congestion charge? Surely that would have been a huge vote winner in an area they are dying to do well wouldn't it?
Robert Tocker, Cadishead (31/03/2008 at 11:55)
PW, Manchester (31/03/2008 at 11:55)
I certainly can't find anything to be envious about. We don't want it, and are not having it thrust upon us by a minority of public transport zealots.
Mark Spencer, Ashton-under-Lyne, Lancashire. (31/03/2008 at 12:01)
Call me Dave, Manchester (31/03/2008 at 12:30)
Congestion is getting worse because the council have engineered it. Remember the council measure congestion in terms of average traffic speed and Labour road safety policy for the last ten years has centred on reducing traffic speeds through traffic calming, traffic lights and bus lanes.
Well done Manchester Council you have managed to make congestion worse even though less cars are using the roads, Now we know why
Call me Dave, Manchester (31/03/2008 at 12:30)
But nobody else is bidding for TIF money
ace, manchester (31/03/2008 at 12:33)
Kurt Stephens, Sale (31/03/2008 at 12:38)
I an not naive enough to believe that my views on TIF are by anyway shape or form the 'norm' for the area or the country.
However, I do believe those who are dead set against the plans are also not speaking for the average person.
Most of the people who post on here would disagree with TIF if the charge was 50pence a day, delivered free public transport, with 24hr regular buses through every estate, hundreds of new train carriges and Metrolink down every high street.
The simple fact is that the vast vast majority of people in the area either don't care about TIF, and even if they do, they sit somewhere very much in the middle.
They are not dead set against TIF, and they are not 100% behind the idea of a congestion charging.
I honestly believe that practically everyone is willing to agree or disagree with the plans depending on the improvements to private and public transport that will be delivered, compared to the price paid.
For example, in Bolton less than 15% of the population travel into the M60 during the congestion charge times, of which 5% travel on public transport, 10% in cars.
Now, you are not telling me that the 85% of people who never travel into Manchester (the M60), or the 5% that use public transport have an opinion at either end of the scale of anti or pro TIF, they will simply make up their minds depending on the varying costs and benefits that they perceive will occur.
Against Injustice, Manchester (31/03/2008 at 13:53)
Chess Piece Face, Manchester (31/03/2008 at 14:06)
Alan Kelly (31/03/2008 at 14:31)
If the proposals are to reduce congestion, as you and the pro tax councillors would have us believe, how will we pay back the loan?
The truth is that we need the congestion to pay back the loan. Therefore it is nothing more than a revenue raising process.
Munkey Boy, Audenshaw, Manchester (31/03/2008 at 15:40)
Alan Kelly is getting congestion and traffic confused again. People aren't charged based on whether they create congestion, merely on whether they cross a charging point. Traffic does not inherently mean congestion.
PW, Manchester (31/03/2008 at 15:49)
This is not a tax to hit those who travel to the city centre. That is a lie. It hits most working people who cannot use public transport to get to their work.
And, I'll come out and say this - the damn thing is full of chavs and misfits who don't know how to behave. Keep your buses that stink. I don't want to use them, and neither do your Councillors nor GMPTE officials!
The Bobelesque, MANCHESTER (31/03/2008 at 16:27)
See it's simple. I can see why only confused or not very intelligent people would support the charge.
Kurt Stephens, Sale (31/03/2008 at 17:37)
Of course there will still be people driving, no one has ever said that all journeys must stop, and those journeys will be the ones that pay the £1.8bn loan from the bid.
Just as in London, Stockholm, Milan etc etc many journeys will continue to be made into the zones, and these journeys will pay the loan back.
Kurt Stephens, Sale (31/03/2008 at 18:51)
Unless we improve public transport, dramatically, as these plans will, people like you will not use the existing infrastructure which will simply not be improved.
Over time, as the capacity will not be increased in the region, as the economy grows as will the congestion, at a certain point, this will have an adverse effect on the regions economy and hold us back.
It is the regions leaders responsibility to ensure that scenario doesn't happen, and TIF is the only realistic way that can happen.
Timberman, MANCHESTER (31/03/2008 at 19:57)
Snare Drum (Manchester Against Road Tolls), Ashton-under-Lyne (31/03/2008 at 21:03)